Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00952-10
Original file (00952-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
‘ 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SJN
Docket No: 00952-10
4 November 2010

 

es,

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 November 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support

thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,
and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

2 March 1988. Based on the information currently contained in
your record it appears that on 10 February 1989, you began a
period of unauthorized absence (UA) that lasted 437 days, ending
on 24 April 1990. You submitted a written request for an other
than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for the above period of UA. Prior to submitting this request for
discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were
advised of your rights, and were warned of the probable adverse
consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your
request for discharge was granted and, on 4 June 1990, you
received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by
court-martial. As a result of this action, you were spared the
stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties
of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given that charges were preferred to a court-martial for a period
of UA totaling over 14 months, and request for discharge. The
Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge was approved. The Board also
concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the
Navy when your request for discharge was granted and should not
be permitted to change it now. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel

Beil be furnished upon request.

so

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
“favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the

existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,

\S\so. SS.

W. DEAN P I
Executive Bi tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13211-09

    Original file (13211-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 August 1989 you began a 119 day period of UA from your unit until you were apprehended on 20 December 1989.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03351-09

    Original file (03351-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03910-09

    Original file (03910-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 4 June 1990 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court - Martial for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13215-09

    Original file (13215-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears that you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06023-09

    Original file (06023-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04970-10

    Original file (04970-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2011. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06063-10

    Original file (06063-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. As a result of the foregoing, on 16 February 1990, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02686-10

    Original file (02686-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or ifijuetice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06467-08

    Original file (06467-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board: consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You served without disciplinary incident until 15 July 1989, when you received...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07480-09

    Original file (07480-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...